As you know, currently a discussion is going on about how to best redo the MB3D program. I am opening up this poll for anyone to express their opinion as to how the new program (project) should be named. If you don't like any of the names presented in the poll, you can write your own suggestion as a comment. If you don't care - then forever keep your silence

This poll will run for 14 days. After this, the final decision on the name will be made by me based on the poll results and any comments.

I think the name should depend on how similar the program will be to MB3D. If it use the same approach, even with different UI it should be Mandelbulb3D 2.0 as Sockratease suggested. But if this will be something completely different (fractal defined by nodes, no backward compatibility by importing of old settings), I would use different name but none of proposed. Can I suggest Fractus4D? 4D because I suppose the application will be used for animation so 4th dimension will be the time.

I agree that "Mandelbulb3D 2.0" is the best suggestion here, but I think that it is also a bit misleading/dangerous as the current version of MB3D is already 1.91. I have announced to release 1.92 sooner or later, and maybe someone else takes over the old code and we will finally reach 2.00 with it. So, there would be MB3D 2.0 and MB3D v2.0 or something like this. (I think it is not so unlikely as the new project has so many ambitions that it will probably take years to finish)

Another note, users like abbreviations, they work with "Apo", "Chao", "MB3D", "JWild", ... I think "MB3D2" is not a good abbreviation.

I agree that "Mandelbulb3D 2.0" is the best suggestion here, but I think that it is also a bit misleading/dangerous as the current version of MB3D is already 1.91. I have announced to release 1.92 sooner or later, and maybe someone else takes over the old code and we will finally reach 2.00 with it. So, there would be MB3D 2.0 and MB3D v2.0 or something like this. (I think it is not so unlikely as the new project has so many ambitions that it will probably take years to finish)

Another note, users like abbreviations, they work with "Apo", "Chao", "MB3D", "JWild", ... I think "MB3D2" is not a good abbreviation.

Cheers!

Return Of The Son Of Mandelbulb3D! {ROTSOMB3D}

Logged

Life is complex - It has real and imaginary components.

The All New Fractal Forums is now in Public Beta Testing! Visit FractalForums.org and check it out!

I think the name should depend on how similar the program will be to MB3D. If it use the same approach, even with different UI it should be Mandelbulb3D 2.0 as Sockratease suggested. But if this will be something completely different (fractal defined by nodes, no backward compatibility by importing of old settings), I would use different name but none of proposed. Can I suggest Fractus4D? 4D because I suppose the application will be used for animation so 4th dimension will be the time.

I like the 4D but it could also be referring to the 4D formulas.

Mandelbulb3D is the more common usage (by Jesse) vs Mandelbulb 3D

MB3D2 1.0?...MB3D2 2.0? looks awkward.

I think the name should be in flux at least until the first working prototype alpha release.

I think the name should depend on how similar the program will be to MB3D. If it use the same approach, even with different UI it should be Mandelbulb3D 2.0 as Sockratease suggested. But if this will be something completely different (fractal defined by nodes, no backward compatibility by importing of old settings), I would use different name but none of proposed. Can I suggest Fractus4D? 4D because I suppose the application will be used for animation so 4th dimension will be the time.

Mandelbulb3D 2.0 is good, Mandelbulb3D or MB3D Next Generation or MB3D Next Gen with version number. I think it is correct to distinguish it as different from not only the original but also from the updated versions by Andreas (thargor6) because of it's proposed inability to render exactly the previously created images which often rely on lighting, mapping and other techniques to remain a viable image. Not complaining, but I understand the complexity of this endeavor and I know that backward compatibility will be limited or pushed out in the interest of an upgrade that addresses today's advances in technology. As long as we can access our original versions for images made prior then there is no real issue but as it relates to the naming of the newest edition, it is important to distinguish the two programs and any future version updates by Andreas as he has stated. Good luck! We look forward to seeing how this goes.

importing .obj models would be very nice. Much better alpha support - both an alpha background layer so the final image can be further manipulated in other software, and also support for Alpha maps for use in diffuse colour. Lighting co ordinates for global / position lighting would be much better than sliders IMO. Also when adding hiegtmaps it would be useful if the co ordinates made sense to the camera position.